1,737 research outputs found
Mapping the Future of Scholarly Publishing
Get PDFThe Open Science Initiative (OSI) is a working group convened by the National Science Communication Institute (nSCI) in October 2014 to discuss the issues regarding improving open access for the betterment of science and to recommend possible solutions. The following document summarizes the wide range of issues, perspectives and recommendations from this group’s online conversation during November and December 2014 and January 2015. The 112 participants who signed up to participate in this conversation were drawn mostly from the academic, research, and library communities. Most of these 112 were not active in this conversation, but a healthy diversity of key perspectives was still represented. Individual participants may not agree with all of the viewpoints described herein, but participants agree that this document reflects the spirit and content of the conversation. This main body of this document was written by Glenn Hampson and edited by Joyce Ogburn and Laura Ada Emmett. Additional editorial input was provided by many members of the OSI working group. Kathleen Shearer is the author of Annex 5, with editing by Dominque Bambini and Richard Poynder.
Why journals? Scholarly journals are the backbone of science communication and discovery, and have been for centuries. However, for the past 20 years or so—roughly coinciding with the growth of the Internet— the scholarly publishing system has been under a tremendous and increasing amount of stress due to rapidly increasing subscription prices, rapid proliferation in the number of journals being published, distorted publishing incentives in academia, lax editorial oversight, massive escalation in the global rate of knowledge production, changing communication patterns and expectations in our society, the emergence of open access as a compelling model of free and open information access, and a wide array of other important factors. This stress is particularly affecting access to medical research information today, and particularly in the developing world.
The National Science Communication Institute (nSCI) hosted a conference in late 2013 to explore the broad outlines of this issue. The proceedings of this conference are available online at bit.ly/1zkx6PJ.
In early September of 2014, nSCI recruited and organized over 100 thought-leaders from around the world into a three month long online conversation— named the Open Science Initiative (OSI) working group—to begin looking into viable ways to reform the scholarly publishing system. The transcripts of this conversation have been preserved and are summarized herein.
What are the problems with the current system of scholarly publishing? What are the different perspectives on these problems? What are some possible solutions? What should our goals and our guiding objectives be regarding improving access to research information? Should we even bother worrying about this issue (is the current state of affairs adequate)? What would a future with more open science look like? What might a future without more open science look like? How do we get from where we are now to where we need to be, considering there are so many competing interests and entrenched positions? Why might it be important to act now?
The OSI working group discussed these issues and many others at length. The group also made these three important recommendations (the first two being majority viewpoints):
1. Convene an annual series of high-level conferences between all key stakeholders over the next 10 years to discuss, implement, adjust, and track major reforms to the scholarly publishing system. The first conference is currently being planned for early 2016. The delegate list will be an invited group of 200 decision-makers representing every major stakeholder group in scholarly publishing, participating with the understanding that they will try to reach an agreement on the future of scholarly publishing and will then work to help implement this agreement. The United Nations will be backing these conferences (through UNESCO) and will help mobilize broad and ongoing international support, participation, and funding. Very broad participation from US stakeholders—publishers, authors, federal agencies, companies who use research, institutions that produce research, and more—is critical to getting this effort up and running. While scientific research is certainly a global interest and enterprise, the US is the largest single producer and consumer of this research information, so without strong US participation, global adoption will be difficult to achieve.
2. Find answers to key questions related to reform, as detailed in the summary document. What do we really mean by “publishing” today? Are selfarchiving mandates practical? Are impact factors accurate? Do embargoes serve the public interest? Are there better ways to conduct peer review? Why isn’t open access growing faster? These and many other questions have been identified in this report as starting points for discussion.
3. Investigate the possibility of constructing the world’s first all-scholarship repository (ASR). Our initial discussion regarding this repository is included in Annex 4. Conversations are currently ongoing on this matter. The Department of Energy’s Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) will explore building the prototype ASR (LANL also created arXiv). We are currently preparing a briefing paper for the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy so they can align upcoming federal compliance efforts with this repository. A number of OSI working group members feel that creating the world’s first all-scholarship repository will need to be a precursor to truly comprehensive journal reform, and creating it the right way may end up having a greater impact on science discovery than anything ever attempted to date.
As we push forward with this initiative, the OSI group will need the following kinds of help: Broad buy-in and participation from research agencies, companies and institutions; more input and perspective from publishers, research institutions, government agencies, the public, and other stakeholders; subject matter expertise (such as programming, database construction, user interface design, customer experience, and so on), hardware/hosting support, data integration support, conference support (facility support, logistics, etc.); outreach/PR expertise; and finally, backing by policymakers and major funders. Building this support base will be the only way to achieve effective and long-term sustainable reform.
The budget for the first conference will range between 500k depending on how many of the costs we can cover for participants (more coverage is better—we don’t want people declining our invite on account of budget reasons). The repository effort can begin modestly but will eventually require millions of dollars annually, although much of the eventual operating cost can be recouped through sponsor support, advertising, and value-added services. A start-up budget of $10 million would help get a critical mass of experts working full-time on this project right away.
This initiative already has a broad range of stakeholder support, but as we move forward we want to make sure that everyone has a seat at the table and also make it clear that we’re not just spinning our wheels to produce another white paper for discussion. OSI, nSCI, UNESCO, LANL, and others have committed to undertake an effort to actually shape the future of how we as a society value, share and use science. Care to join us
Recommended from our members
Mapping the Future of Scholarly Publishing, First Edition.
No full textThe National Science Communication Institute (nSCI) hosted a conference in late 2013 to explore the broad issue related to scholarly publishing. The Open Science Initiative (OSI) is a working group convened by the National Science Communication Institute (nSCI) in October 2014 to discuss the issues regarding improving open access for the betterment of science and to recommend possible solutions. The following document summarizes the wide range of issues, perspectives and recommendations from this group’s online conversation during November and December 2014 and January 2015. The 112 participants who signed up to participate in this conversation were drawn mostly from the academic, research, and library communities. Most of these 112 were not active in this conversation, but a healthy diversity of key perspectives was still represented. Individual participants may not agree with all of the viewpoints described herein, but participants agree that this document reflects the spirit and content of the conversation
Report of the G7 Open Science - Research on Research Sub-Working Group: Prepared for the G7 Open Science Working Group
No full textThe G7 Open Science Working Group (OSWG) was established to share open science policies, explore supportive incentive structures, and identify good practices for promoting increasing access to the results of publicly funded research, including scientific data and publications [...] To inform the deliberations of the G7 OSWG, three sub-working groups were created to explore key Open Science topics and formulate policy recommendations:●Interoperability and Sustainability of Infrastructures●Research Assessment and Incentives●Research on Research This report pertains to the topic of Research on Research on Open Science. The mandate of the G7 OSWG Research on Research Sub-Working Group consisted of:●Examining questions at the intersection of Research on Research and Open Science, which are relevant to the adoption of Open Science practices.●Helping to mobilize existing Research on Research knowledge to build more evidence-based Open Science policies.●Identifying knowledge gaps in Research on Research that should be filled, drafting a first attempt of Research on Research agenda, to define more efficient Open Science policies.●Proposing actions based on lessons learned, to inform decision-making and accelerate the Open Science journey.The report was informed by two workshops held by the G7 OSWG Research on Research Sub-Working Group, which convened Open Science experts from across the world to discuss topics such as data-sharing, reproducibility, and research evaluation (October 2021), as well as academic, societal, and economic impacts of Open Science (June 2022). It was also informed through Research on Research itself, as well as discussions and knowledge-sharing between all three G7 OSWG Sub-Working Groups (Research on Research, Interoperability and Sustainability of Infrastructures, and Research Assessment and Incentives). The report was also informed by exchanges with individual researchers (see the list of all contributors at the end of the report). It consists of an overview of the Research on Research landscape on Open Science, as well as research recommendations on behalf of the G7 OSWG Research on Research Sub-Working Group. After more than 10 years of Open Science policies, 20 years of Open Science debates and 30 years after the first digital Open Science initiative (ArXiv), there is still much work to be done to achieve a fully Open Science-minded academic landscape. Some studies have demonstrated that close to 50% of contemporary research publications are open access globally ; however, that proportion fluctuates widely depending on fields of research and countries. With regards to Open or FAIR data (findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable), there are no conclusive studies providing an estimate of the proportion of data globally that is open and/or FAIR. However, the proportion is likely close to 20%, which corresponds more or less to the so-called “big sciences” . In addition, results are still low on issues such as reproducible research and publication bias , and research assessment reform is only in its first stages to facilitate the Open Science transformation. This clearly demonstrates that the path to Open Science has just begun, despite three decades of individual, collective, and political efforts. If the Open Science paradigm is difficult to achieve due to the radical nature of the transformation it implies, the slowness of the associated cultural changes must be understood as resulting from the significant challenge in addressing the cultural changes with adequate, fine-tuned, and contextualized Open Science policies. In other words, if the big picture is clearly drafted, the steps needed to achieve it in a reasonable time are not all clearly identified. Additional efforts to understand obstacles and efficient solutions are needed. In this respect, evidence-based Open Science policies will be of great help, and research on research could play a key role to address the Open Science challenge
The Open Linguistics Working Group
No full textThis paper describes the Open Linguistics Working Group (OWLG) of the Open Knowledge Foundation (OKFN). The OWLG is an initiative concerned with linguistic data by scholars from diverse fields, including linguistics, NLP, and information science. The primary goal of the working group is to promote the idea of open linguistic resources, to develop means for their representation and to encourage the exchange of ideas across different disciplines. This paper summarizes the progress of the working group, goals that have been identified, problems that we are going to address, and recent activities and ongoing developments. Here, we put particular emphasis on the development of a Linked Open Data (sub-)cloud of linguistic resources that is currently being pursued by several OWLG members
The Open Linguistics Working Group
Get PDFThis paper describes the Open Linguistics Working Group (OWLG) of the Open Knowledge Foundation (OKFN). The OWLG is an initiative concerned with linguistic data by scholars from diverse fields, including linguistics, NLP, and information science. The primary goal of the working group is to promote the idea of open linguistic resources, to develop means for their representation and to encourage the exchange of ideas across different disciplines. This paper summarizes the progress of the working group, goals that have been identified, problems that we are going to address, and recent activities and ongoing developments. Here, we put particular emphasis on the development of a Linked Open Data (sub-)cloud of linguistic resources that is currently being pursued by several OWLG members
Open Access Bibliography: Liberating Scholarly Literature with E-Prints and Open Access Journals
Get PDFThe Open Access Bibliography: Liberating Scholarly Literature with E-Prints and Open Access Journals provides an overview of open access concepts, and it presents over 1,300 selected English-language books, conference papers (including some digital video presentations), debates, editorials, e-prints, journal and magazine articles, news articles, technical reports, and other printed and electronic sources that are useful in understanding the open access movement's efforts to provide free access to and unfettered use of scholarly literature. Most sources have been published between 1999 and August 31, 2004; however, a limited number of key sources published prior to 1999 are also included. Where possible, links are provided to sources that are freely available on the Internet (approximately 78 percent of the bibliography's references have such links). The 129-page bibliography has been published in print and PDF formats by the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). The print version is available from ARL. The book is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License
DINI Certificate for Open Access Repositories and Publication Services 2013 [October 2014]
No full textPublishing is an important pillar of the advancement of scientific knowledge and of science as a whole. Among its characteristics are (a) the organization of an effective communication between scientists/scholars (between authors and all potential recipients, i.e. securing an adequate dissemination), (b) a high degree of trustworthiness (e.g. with regard to priority, copyrights, authenticity, and quality of content) that is communicated to the users of publications (i.e. the scientists/scholars), and (c) sustainability and verifiability (persistent citations, long-term availability, traceability of the steps on the way to publication). The present catalog of criteria translates these general expectations of scientific publishing into concrete minimum requirements of Open Access Repositories and Publication Services. As platforms for the publication and presentation of scientific and scholarly works these represent important hubs in the scientific communication process. As Open Access services they facilitate the dissemination and democratization of knowledge. The term Open Access Repositories and Publication Services comprises the following services: • Institutional Open Access repositories • Disciplinary Open Access repositories • Open Access journal
The Open Science and Research Reference Architecture 2024–2030
No full textThe Open Science and Research Reference Architecture describes the desired state of the target area in 2030. Reference Architecture was developed on the initiative of the National Open Science and Research Steering Group and the Ministry of Education and Culture. The reference architecture enables a controlled development and response of open science and research in continuous change. It ensures the stability of research structures as important facilitators of research.
The Open Science and Research Reference Architecture is based on the goals set out in the Declaration for Open Science and Research, as well as the policies specifying these goals and the objectives and actions derived from them. Where necessary, the architecture has been complemented on the basis of international open science frameworks, such as UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science.
There is no clear boundary between open science and closed science; rather, the open and closed variants form a continuum, where previously closed datasets may become open over time, for example. This is why the reference architecture describes the structures of science and research extensively – as open as possible and as restricted as necessary.
The Open Science and Research Reference Architecture was created by a two-year working group appointed by the National Open Science and Research Steering Group. In the spring of 2021, a preparation group appointed by the Steering group prepared the task assignment for the working group. The working group chairs included Jukka Heikkilä from the Finnish Union of University Professors (first chair in 2022) and Susanna Nykyri from Tampere University (first chair in 2023). Ilmari Jauhiainen and Marita Kari from the Federation of Finnish Learned Societies served as the secretaries of the working group. The Open Science and Research Reference Architecture underwent a round of public feedback for the period of 17 April – 2 June 2023.The Open Science and Research Reference Architecture was developed on the initiative of the National Open Science and Research Steering Group and the Ministry of Education and Culture. The reference architecture enables a controlled development and response of open science and research in continuous change. It ensures the stability of research structures as important facilitators of research.
The Open Science and Research Reference Architecture is based on the goals set out in the Declaration for Open Science and Research, as well as the policies specifying these goals and the objectives and actions derived from them. Where necessary, the architecture has been complemented on the basis of international open science frameworks, such as UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science.
The Open Science and Research Reference Architecture was created by a two-year working group appointed by the National Open Science and Research Steering Group. In the spring of 2021, a preparation group appointed by the Steering group prepared the task assignment for the working group. The working group chairs included Jukka Heikkilä from the Finnish Union of University Professors (first chair in 2022) and Susanna Nykyri from Tampere University (first chair in 2023). Ilmari Jauhiainen and Marita Kari from the Federation of Finnish Learned Societies served as the secretaries of the working group. The Open Science and Research Reference Architecture underwent a round of public feedback for the period of 17 April – 2 June 2023
The Digital Technology Boomerang: New Intellectual Property Rights Threaten Global “Open Science”
Get PDFThere is a serious threat that ill-considered government support for expanding legal means of controlling access to information for the purpose of extracting private economic rents is resulting in the 'over- fencing of the public knowledge commons' in science and engineering. Such a new 'tragedy of the commons' would bring adverse long-run consequences for future welfare gains through technological progress, and re-distributional effects further disadvantaging the present economically less advanced countries of the world. Radical legal innovations in intellectual property protection that seriously jeopardize the effective conduct of open, collaborative science have been introduced by the little noticed European Database Directive of March 1996. This initiative forms an emblematic and substantively significant aspect of the broader set of transformations in intellectual property rights institutions that have been initiated in response to the economic ramifications of rapid progress in digital information technologies. The EC Directive poses numerous contentious issues in law and economics that will create ambiguities for business and non-profit activities in this area for years to come. The terms on which those issues are resolved will materially affect the costs and organizational feasibility of scientific projects that are of global reach and importance, especially those that depend heavily upon the collection, management and analysis of large volumes of observational data that cannot be regenerated. This paper sets out the economic case for the effectiveness of open, collaborative research, and the forces behind the recent, countervailing rush to strengthen and expand the scope of intellectual property rights protection. Focusing upon innovations in copyright law and the sui generis protection of hitherto unprotected content, it documents the genesis and analyzes the economic implications of the EC's Database Directive, and related legislative proposals (H.R. 3125, H.R. 354 and H.R. 1858) in the US. Several modest remedial proposals are advanced to mitigate the adverse impact of 'the digital technology boomerang' upon open science.intellectual property rights, copyright, sui generis protection of expressive material, economics of information-goods, open science, 'fair use,' scientific databases
Recommended from our members
EarthCube Governance Framework: A Proposal to the Community - Documentation, Research, and Recommendations
No full textEarthCube, established by the National Science Foundation (NSF), is envisioned to transform the conduct of research through the development of community-guided cyberinfrastructure for the Geosciences. EarthCube is intended to create a networked, knowledge management system that integrates Earth system and human dimensions data in an open, transparent, and inclusive manner. In order to achieve this vision, EarthCube requires broad community participation in concept, framework, and implementation, and must not be hindered by rigid preconceptions such as assuming one particular management or organizational structure. If successful, EarthCube may be a prototype for development of similar systems across other domain sciences as part of the NSF Cyberinfrastructure for the 21st Century (CIF21) initiative and related efforts nationally and internationally. During the spring of 2012, NSF merged several governance-related Expressions of Interest into a single Governance Working Group, led by the Governance Steering Committee, with connections to a broad network forum of individuals and organizations known as the Governance Forum. The governance research review and community engagement efforts by this group culminated in a Governance Roadmap delivered to the NSF-sponsored June charrette (community event). The Governance Roadmap was the product of six months of research on governance theory and models, historical infrastructure case studies, and community feedback and engagement. Based on our findings from the research review and from community engagement, we the crafted following definition of governance: “Governance refers to the processes, structure and organizational elements that determine, within an organization or system of organizations, how power is exercised, how stakeholders have their say, how decisions are made, and how decision makers are held accountable.”Documents in the AZGS Document Repository collection are made available by the Arizona Geological Survey (AZGS) and the University Libraries at the University of Arizona. For more information about items in this collection, please contact [email protected]
- …
